Rifle Scopes Gen II PST question

In for the answers to this as well. Im looking to invest in a pst gen 2 3-15 or potentially a 5-25... its going on an 5.56 AR so im thinking 3-15.

I have a pst gen 2 and honestly have been a little disappointed with the clarity at 25x, it's still very usable and doesn't look foggy. But it does get noticeably darker and a little blurry. When I say blurry the target I am aiming at is clear when I use side focus/parralax, but the rest of the sight picture is blurry. At 18x and below the picture is crystal clear.

I'm thinking I'll have to upgrade to a Amg or gen 2 razor to get noticeably better glass.

If I had a do over, and needed to stay in the price range, I would be looking hard @ the athlon ares Etr, the ares btr imo is a step down in glass from the pst and of course the turrets on the pst smoke the btr. However the etr ares has awesome turrets and great glass, (from what I've seen)

I have used all of the scopes you mention except the Ares. ATACR 5-25 mil-C might be my favorite scope at any price range. Good enough glass for anything with a great reticle and very good turrets.

That being said, the PST 2 is a big downgrade from the ATACR and a big upgrade from the XTR II. I think it's a great value in that price range. I don't like the XTR II at all personally. The couple that I've seen both had awful, awful glass at high mag (I agree the 4-20 is better a little). But I think the XTR 5-25 suffers from significant sample variation, because some folks like it.

The PST2 is a very nice scope for the money glass-wise. I like the turrets ok and the reticle is nice as well. I'd prefer it over the Chinese-made Ares ETR by a good bit personally.

I had an XTRii 5-25. It was one of my first scopes and I thought it was a great scope at the time but ignorance was bliss. Once I tried some other scopes in less than perfect conditions I really saw its short comings in the glass department. My favorite scope that I own in that price range is the Tract Toric HD. Actually it is one of my favorite scopes period. For the money I have not found anything that comes close. It’s only real shortcoming is the reticle if you like the tree style reticle. I have been trying to get my hands on an Ares ETR though as I have heard they are exceptional but I would still probably go with the LOW made Toric.

I own both the 3-18 and 2-25 PST Gen II. For the price I think they are great, granted I got a military discount when I bought them. At full magnification it is a little fuzzy but I rarely go that high. I so far I’m happy with both for my intended uses.

I got rid of a pst2 to get more elevation adjustment. I thought I would need a larger tube but then I saw the swfa 5-20 HD is listed at 30 mils which would do it for me. Reality is more like 35 because I am now zeroed 5 below bottoming out and I still have a full 30 left.

Anyway, I thought the pst was fine. Same as others, on 18ish it looks great but at 25 the clarity/quality fell off some. The swfa really surprised me with how good the glass is all if the way to 20x. I just saw one for sale here for $950.

AMP! said:

So I’m looking to get a Gen II PST here soon but wanted to ask about clarity first.

How is the glass on these at higher magnification?

I had the 5-25 XTR II and over 18-20 the clarity was pretty awful. Looked as if I was looking through fog. So I sold it cheap and got a 4-20 which seemed better.

The 5-25 ATACR and 4-14 SHV F1 are crystal clear at every mag, so I’m curious how you guys who have used the Gen II PST think they compare to other scopes around this price range ($800-$1,200). I don’t want another 5-25 XTR disappointment.

Click to expand...

It's excellent up to around 18-20x. After you do see a noticeable change in clarity and also brightness. The eye box also becomes very strict. Depends on your use though too, for PRS I rarely go above 12-16x power so the PST is still sufficient. But for Long range if I really want to have a refined POA and max mag, the sight picture suffers a bit.

Good info so far, i had seriously considered the xtr2 for awhile but wrote it off after all the info i read about bad glass. Everybody seems to like the mechanics of it though. Not trying to steal your thread AMP! It seems like we are having the same thoughts though.

The 3-15 is considered the best optically in the line...


I have an Xrs 2 in the box. My xrs 1 went back and they gave me a 2. Haven’t figured out if I want to open it and use it

Pick your poison.
I took a look at a demo PST II 3-15 and compared it to an older XTR II 3-15, sightron S Tac 2.5-17.5 and a Bushnell 4.5-18.
The PST had the nicest "clicks", the Bushnell had the nicest glass, the Sightron was hanging with both of those very well in both glass and "clicks".
The XTR II trailed in the glass department.
The sightron will focus down to 10 yards, the other 3 at 50.

The PST was really a nicer package than the XTR II, however, while both a have a reputation for tracking, the XTR has a better reputation for ruggedness.
It is rumored that there have been improvements made to the XTR glass, whether it is coatings or grinding, I don't know.

I like Vortex and Burris both, but if it was me, I would save up a little longer and get the Bushnell.
I really like my LRTSi.

AMP! said:

Why wouldn't you use it?

Click to expand...

I was thinking about going with a 30mm tube scope like the amg. I need something for my mountain hunting gun

AMP! said:

Yeah now I'm looking at the 5-25 Gen II PST or the 3.5-21 Bushnell DMR II.
I'd love to hear more about those with experience with the DMR II or the XRS II (Can save up for it over the holidays, that is if they come back in stock)
Particularly interested in the glass clarity at those higher magnifications.

Click to expand...

I have the GEN I ,Gen II PST and Razor Gen II... buddy has the Bushnell XRS II and DMR II. I've looked through the Burris when I was shopping for my Gen II PST, but don't have much time behind it.

GEN I PST 4-16X
Burris
Gen II PST 5-25
Bushnell DMR II
XRS II
Razor Gen II 4.5-27

I honestly think the GEN II PST is maybe a little under-rated, it's solid scope with a good mix of features for it's price point. I'm happy with the one I put on my backup rifle, even though I have a Razor II on my other one... I think being 1/2 the price helps!

I have the pst 2 5-25x50 on my Tikka T3 24" 6.5cm now and have owned a Burris XTR 2 5-25x50 in the past. Gen 2 is a step up in everyway. I didn't say two steps. I'm in the process of selling/trading it off right now. I have heard multiple reports and talked to several guys that say the 3-15 is the one to get and is the best optically(Glass). Not sure why, to my eye they look the same? I was considering a 3-15 for my AR-10. Instead I'm going with a Sig Tango 6 3-18x44 on my AR-10, better glass/shorter/34mm tube/ locking turrets. I'm selling because I want locking turrets on my hunting rig. I'll buy a 3-15 for one of my other rifles and will pick up a AMG for my tikka, down the road.

I own a both gen 2 razors and I can honestly say that if I hadn't bought the 4.5-27x56 before either of these ones above, I could have been happy with the gen 2 PST and never know the difference. I agree 100% with the post above.

Maybe it's because I don't shoot PRS regularly, but I have no idea why anyone has to have magnification in the 18-25x or so range. I don't remember the last time I shot above 12ish at less than 1350 yards. Every scope I've had is just ok at its max magnification...

I have a 3-15x44 and everything past 12 or 13 gets dark.

That said, I really like mine and it has been a solid performer. Just figure on the top 10-15% of your mag range being a little dark

I actually don't mind the darkening at high mag range. What bugs me is losing a clear sight picture and watching it go fuzzy/blurry.

When folks say the 3-15 is better optically, I think for the most part the biggest difference is that it doesn't lose performance at the top end of its mag range quite as much as the 5-25. I've seen the 3-15 for a short time and thought it was excellent up til about 13x/14x, and it does fall off just a hair at the very top end. The 5-25 starts falling off past about 20x, but it's really fantastic in the 18x-20x range and it's still serviceable up to 25x, although the performance at 24x and 25x is a noticeable step down from the 18x-20x range. Neither the 3-15 or 5-25 has falloff that is horrendous or anything, and that's JMHO based on a sample size of 1 of each. In my experience, the 3-15 has a tiny bit better clarity/resolution in it's mid range as well, but the difference is really, really small.

If you are going to shoot long range and don't need the 3-5x zoom range at the bottom end, there is no question in my mind that you should get the 5-25. The mostly minimal optical differences shouldn't drive you to a mag range that's less useful for your shooting. The 5-25 PST is a really nice scope at its price range - there's a reason they sell a ton of them.

patriot07 said:

When folks say the 3-15 is better optically, I think for the most part the biggest difference is that it doesn't lose performance at the top end of its mag range quite as much as the 5-25. I've seen the 3-15 for a short time and thought it was excellent up til about 13x/14x, and it does fall off just a hair at the very top end. The 5-25 starts falling off past about 20x, but it's really fantastic in the 18x-20x range and it's still serviceable up to 25x, although the performance at 24x and 25x is a noticeable step down from the 18x-20x range. Neither the 3-15 or 5-25 has falloff that is horrendous or anything, and that's JMHO based on a sample size of 1 of each. In my experience, the 3-15 has a tiny bit better clarity/resolution in it's mid range as well, but the difference is really, really small.

If you are going to shoot long range and don't need the 3-5x zoom range at the bottom end, there is no question in my mind that you should get the 5-25. The mostly minimal optical differences shouldn't drive you to a mag range that's less useful for your shooting. The 5-25 PST is a really nice scope at its price range - there's a reason they sell a ton of them.

Click to expand...

How does the eye box get after 20x? Is it true that they eyebox is a lot more forgiving that the original PST line?
I have a Viper HST 4-16x44 and the eye box gets extremely tight at 16x, have used a mates PST 4-16 and 6-24 and they too are almost unusable under some conditions on max magnification

For similar money I'd go with a used Gen 1 Razor 5-20x50 or a Ares ETR 4.5-30.

beetroot said:

How does the eye box get after 20x? Is it true that they eyebox is a lot more forgiving that the original PST line?
I have a Viper HST 4-16x44 and the eye box gets extremely tight at 16x, have used a mates PST 4-16 and 6-24 and they too are almost unusable under some conditions on max magnification

Click to expand...

It does get a bit tight at the top end. Not as forgiving as the Kahles 624i or ATACR 5-25, but not at the price of those either.

By 20x, it's no issue at all. It's useable at 25x, just a little bit tighter than you'd like.

I agree with the last guy who said a Gen 1 Razor is another good option. But generally speaking, I think the Gen 1 Razor price used is a couple hundred higher than a PST2 new, if you get a decent discount. So that's not exactly an apples to apples comparison. But the Gen 1 Razor is a slightly better scope in terms of glass and build quality. But if you cut the PST2 off at 20x, I think the glass is really close to the Razor Gen 1. So once again, not apples to apples.

patriot07 said:

When folks say the 3-15 is better optically, I think for the most part the biggest difference is that it doesn't lose performance at the top end of its mag range quite as much as the 5-25. I've seen the 3-15 for a short time and thought it was excellent up til about 13x/14x, and it does fall off just a hair at the very top end. The 5-25 starts falling off past about 20x, but it's really fantastic in the 18x-20x range and it's still serviceable up to 25x, although the performance at 24x and 25x is a noticeable step down from the 18x-20x range. Neither the 3-15 or 5-25 has falloff that is horrendous or anything, and that's JMHO based on a sample size of 1 of each. In my experience, the 3-15 has a tiny bit better clarity/resolution in it's mid range as well, but the difference is really, really small.

If you are going to shoot long range and don't need the 3-5x zoom range at the bottom end, there is no question in my mind that you should get the 5-25. The mostly minimal optical differences shouldn't drive you to a mag range that's less useful for your shooting. The 5-25 PST is a really nice scope at its price range - there's a reason they sell a ton of them.

Click to expand...

I'll sell you mine..

I love mine but I want to go with something a little lighter for hunting..

I have a Gen I 4-16 & 6-24, a Gen II 5-25 and a DMR II.

Been a vortex fanboy for a long time but man, I love the DMRII. Be patient, you can find them damn near brand new on here for around $1000-1150ish... i did.

Shot a SHV F1 4-14 side by side with my PST Genii 3-15. The pst holds a bit of an edge in the glass department over the shv. For a hunting scope it’s a wash. I’d go with the nightforce for the covered turret.

I have 4 of the Gen II PST scopes. I really like them. Which would explain why I have 4 of them.

I think the clarity issue at 25X has a lot to do with the lighting, mirage, moisture in the air etc... There are some days that I look through the scope at 25X and I back off to about 20X to see everything a little more clearly. On other days, seeing everything clearly at 25X is no problem.

The rifles that I have the scope on are chambered in .22LR, 5.56mm, 22-250 and 308. So they really don't have the range capability that something like a 6.5CM or 6.5PRC would have. I share that because I considered the comments about the clarity issue at 25X prior to purchasing the first scope.

Since I would not have the hit probability of other cartridges, I figured that even if the scope was not as clear at 25X, I would not be shooting at the longer ranges when it's needed the most. If I were going to be shooting past 1000 yards, I would look for something in the Vortex line with the 34mm tube.

I let a few other long range shooters try out my rifles, and they all had positive comments about the scopes. Maybe they were just being nice but still had a smile on their faces after shooting my rifles with the GEN II PST scopes.

We just received a shipment of the Ares ETR's and would be glad to discuss these with you. Give a call, 516-217-1000

padom said:

Athlon Ares ETR blows the GenII out of the water in glass department if you ask me. I got rid of my GenII PST the same week I received it. Was very disappointed with the glass clarity. Very hazy if you ask me. On the flip side, I am blown away with how clear the glass is on the Ares ETR for the money. Its a very solid built scope as well. Im buying another one Im so impressed with it.

I also have multiple Gen2 Razor's and the Athlon Cronus BTR. The Ares ETR is king of that $1000 price range if you ask me.

Click to expand...

What are the turrets like on the ETR?
The Ares BTR seems to have pretty poor turrets from all the reviews, with the PST Gen 2 being far better in that regard.

The Turrets on the ETR are far superior to those on the BTR. No similarity

AMP! said:

Guess I’ll be giving you a call next week. ?

Click to expand...

Our pleasure to "meet" and assist you. Have a great week

This past weekend I was at my local gun shop as was able to do a side by side comparison with a PST Gen2 5-25 and Ares ETR. I agree that the ETR is better in most areas. I have been trying to decide which one to get. I think I am going to go with the Razor Gen 1 (like a few others have suggested). Trying right now to trade a KRG W3 folder for one, before I just order it from Vortex.

AMP! said:

Anyone have experience with the Bushnell DMR 2 or XRS 2 in regard to glass quality? I wish I had a store close by to check some of these out, but the nearest one is a 2-3 hour drive.

Click to expand...

The DMR2 is decent, but both the DMR2 Pro and XRS2 are a significant improvement in glass quality. I have two XRS2s and a DMR2 Pro on my personal rifles. IMO, they both beat out everything I have looked through in the ~2k range, and rival or equal most of the $3k+ optics. Even some hardcore Nightforce fanboys that have looked through my XRS2s have walked away impressed with the Bushnells.

You're not going to find a DMR2 Pro anywhere close to $1200 through normal retail channels. Minimum advertised price is right at $2k, and Bushnell is enforcing it. Same with the roughly $2250 MAP on the XRS2.

I have the 5-25x50 SFP EBR-4. I loved it but hated the eye box. Tracking was spot on. I have one for sale on here.

EbTac said:

I have the 5-25x50 SFP EBR-4. I loved it but hated the eye box. Tracking was spot on. I have one for sale on here.

Click to expand...

What about the eye do you hate?

beetroot said:

What about the eye do you hate?

Click to expand...

The eye box isn't the most forgiving. But that could just be me. You get spoiled looking through a gen 2 razor or a s&b.
It's a great scope for the money plus it's a vortex. Best warranty out there.

AMP! said:

So I’m looking to get a Gen II PST here soon but wanted to ask about clarity first.

How is the glass on these at higher magnification?

I had the 5-25 XTR II and over 18-20 the clarity was pretty awful. Looked as if I was looking through fog. So I sold it cheap and got a 4-20 which seemed better.

The 5-25 ATACR and 4-14 SHV F1 are crystal clear at every mag, so I’m curious how you guys who have used the Gen II PST think they compare to other scopes around this price range ($800-$1,200). I don’t want another 5-25 XTR disappointment.

Click to expand...

Well... the XTR II and the ATACR are apples to oranges and opposite sides of the spectrum with glass quality and price point. I really think that Vortex knocked it out of the park on the PST Gen 2's, the glass is much much better than the Gen 1's but to place it in a category that you have reference too I would say they lay in-between the ATACR and closer to the XTR II at higher magnification, so not amazing but good, and great for the price point. If you really want to do it right you go with a Razor or NF ATACR. Then again I don't think you can go wrong with the PST for the money it's going to be better than the XTR.